chris was referring to at 18-15 in game 1 of the md1 final . Yes, I was referring to at 18-15 in Game 1 of the MD1 Final. That was at a crucial moment of the game too. What surprised me was that the BIG screen showed the playback of the shot (that it was IN), but the umpire refused to correct his wrong decision. .
But once it's been changed it can't be changed again I thought ?!?! That's what the rules state. Otherwise if a wrong call is made by the line judge and the umpire doesn't correct, but the big screen shows there was an error, the umpire still can't change the call. Personally I feel that a simple tv replay system is more than enough. No need for hawkeye or anything like that...
That was a costly point to lose for the KOR pair . The replay was shown almost immediately for everyone to see. Even LYD pointed to the BIG screen (showing what should be the correct call). Anyway, that was a costly point to lose for the KOR pair (at that crucial moment of that game). .
FIFA will introduce goal-line technology . On Thursday, 05-July-2012, FIFA says it will introduce goal-line technology at the Club World Cup in Japan in December 2012, and plans to use it at the 2013 Confederations Cup and the 2014 World Cup. I wonder when BWF will follow with similar court-line technology? Source: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1666382/FIFA-approves-goal-line-technology FIFA will introduce goal-line technology at the Club World Cup in Japan in December, and plans to use it at the 2013 Confederations Cup and the 2014 World Cup. Football finally embraced goal-line technology as FIFA's lawmaking panel approved two systems for use in matches on Thursday. FIFA will introduce goal-line technology at the seven-team Club World Cup in Japan in December, and plans to use it in Brazil at the 2013 Confederations Cup and 2014 World Cup. FIFA President Sepp Blatter said the approved Hawk-Eye and GoalRef systems would provide "99 percent security" that a notorious refereeing error which helped eliminate England at the last World Cup would not be repeated. "There is no 100 percent guarantee in life. In the past we didn't have accurate systems, but I have to say, 'Thank you, Lampard,'" Blatter said, referring to England midfielder Frank Lampard, whose clear goal against Germany did not count in South Africa two years ago. FIFA will use both goal-line systems in Japan, after they won unanimous support from the International Football Association Board (IFAB) panel, chaired by Blatter. The English Premier League is expected to adopt one of the systems - which are expected to cost up to $US250,000 per stadium to install - during next season. Major League Soccer in the United States has also expressed interest. The IFAB panel, comprising officials from FIFA and the four British football associations, also approved a five-officials system of refereeing which UEFA President Michel Platini promoted as an alternative to technology. In a third historic ruling, the panel reversed a ban on women players, notably in the Middle East, wearing headscarves in FIFA competitions which had been enforced for safety reasons in 2007. The three decisions "will be long lasting and resonate throughout the world," said Patrick Nelson, chief executive of the Northern Ireland association. Thursday's decision was expected and completed Blatter's U-turn, after FIFA had previously blocked using technology to help referees make decisions. It followed two weeks after another major tournament was blighted by a goal-line error, as European Championship co-host Ukraine was denied a goal against England in a decisive group match. "It became evident the moment what happened in South Africa in 2010, that this cannot be repeated, and it happened again in the Ukraine. Ukraine can still not believe it," Blatter said. The IFAB panel accepted test results conducted by a Zurich-based technology institute that proved Hawk-Eye and GoalRef could accurately judge when balls crossed the goal line, and send an immediate signal to the match referee. Hawk-Eye is a British camera-based system already used in tennis and cricket. GoalRef is a Danish-German project using magnetic sensors in the goalposts to track a special ball. .
US$250,000 to install per stadium?! That'd be more than the total prize money in a typical Super Series or Premier badminton tournament!
Wtf?! What's wrong with having a couple of people watching a frame-by-frame replay of the line cameras? If they can send it hundreds of miles to my telly, surely they can send it to a VDU in the stadium... no need for space-age Hawkeye nonsense.
Football governing body (IFAB) has finally bowed to the demands for GOAL-line technology ie Hawk-Eye and the GoalRef systems in the sport. Fifa's president Sepp Blatter changed his mind on the goal-line technology after Frank Lampard's disallowed goal for England against Germany in the 2010 World Cup. The nod will give the green light to the Premier League and Football Association introducing the technology into their competitions most probably this year and definitely next. The IFAB, has insisted that the technology is to be used only as an aid to referees to make a decision, rather than being the deciding factor in whether the ball has crossed the line. The Hawk-Eye system – developed by a British company now owned by Sony – is based on cameras and GoalRef, a Danish-German development, uses magnetic fields. Will the BWF also follow the trend and implement the Hawk-Eye system so as to avoid disputed line calls?
Frame-by-frame replay of the line cameras should do the job . Probably BWF won't have enough money to implement the Hawk-Eye system. Like what Mark A has suggested, frame-by-frame replay of the line cameras should do the job. .
That's all good. But one has to know that there will be some replays that aren't definitive, so controversy will not be completely eliminated. There are times in ice hockey where the replay is uncertain so the official's original call stands. One team is still left griping. BUT the aggreived coach tends to stop his apoplectic fit of outrage more quickly when there is no objective leg to stand on. So if replay rulings have done nothing else, they have perhaps prevented a few strokes behind the benches. :/
Frame by frame would be ok in badminton as like tennis there is time between points, the reason the football system cost 250,000 is that is a real time monitoring system so when the ball crosses the line the referee instantly knows through an ear piece. Using a frame by frame TV camera was rejected by FIFA as it would interrupt the flow of the game. In badminton like tennis a limit on any challenges would have to be introduced though otherwise any close calls would always be challenged by someone. Luckily unlike tennis due to the shuttlecock normally the cork does land first so a TV camera with a high frame rate would probably be sufficient in 99% of cases (so no need for hawk eye as in tennis where the margins are more often blurred on serves) if there's still no idea after looking at the camera image say with the on court call.
BWF cannot afford to pay for the use of either the Hawk-Eye or the GoalRef system . Yes, controversy will not be completely eliminated when BWF cannot afford to pay for the use of either the Hawk-Eye or the GoalRef system. .
even fifa admits there is no 100% fail safe guarantee even with the 2 new systems (goalref and hawkeye *together*) in soccer ...
incorrect over-rule - a most definite no-no Not as rare. The umpire was Håkan Fossto (SWE, retiring 2012) you are talking about, who is considered by his peers to be a very good umpire. I doubt if his superiors informed him about this during the end-of-day or next-day briefing. Making a correct call wrong is a definite no-no in my book - this is influencing the outcome of that rally. It appears that Umpire Fossto made the correction based on his belief that he correctly saw the shuttle land outside the court. Which just demonstrates that it is extremely difficult to judge the fact from the umpire's chair on such shots, and the decision is best left it to those who are properly placed to judge, viz., the line judge. The general procedure is that when the umpire over-rules immediately, it is usually accepted as a correct over-rule. This immediate over-rule is a practice listed in the BWF umpiring guidelines and recommendations. There are time when very experienced umpires follow the umpiring guidelines and recommendations blindly, as was the case here.
There is nothing like that's what the rules state. Umpires will correct a call based on fact, fact that is seen by his/her own eyes. The basic premise of this correction is to make things right that were previously wrong. In this MD clash, the umpire made a correct call by the line judge incorrect by his correction. Now when he corrects his incorrect call, there will be no credibility left. How are the players to believe anything he says or does from then on. As a practical player, you just forget about the situation soon and concentrate on winning the next rally. Recall that after the correction, his next gesture was to signal the Korean(s) toward their court, which would suggest that he did not want any discussion. Any umpire worth his score-card would admit on a later review that that correction was wrong. But just as the practical player, one forgets and concentrates on the next rally.
^^ I would've loved to see the irony of the KOR players getting a yellow card for continuing to argue the incorrect overrule. . That'd be the ultimate double injustice.
Likely we will use computer replays soon in selected major events in 2013 . Just found this comment from Tine Baun (on Saturday August 4, 2012) at the 2012 London Olympics. Source: http://thestar.com.my/sports/olympics/story.aspx?file=/2012/8/4/olympics/11797226&sec=Olympics TINE Baun is likely to get the computer replay line decisions she called for after her emotional defeat in the quarter-finals of the Olympic women’s singles badminton tournament on Thursday. The former world No. 1 from Denmark was bitterly disappointed with one crucial line decision during her 21-15, 22-20 loss to Saina Nehwal, the Commonwealth champion from India. Baun believes Sania’s last shot at 20-18 in the second game landed a couple of inches out and that the match should have gone to a decider. But the line judge called it in, causing Baun to toss her racquet away and hold her head in disbelief. Three rallies later she had lost the match. There was also a close line decision incident involving Olympic champion Lin Dan at 12-5 in the final game of his men’s singles quarter-final with Japan’s Sho Sasaki. Lin Dan’s attempted kill was called out, annoying the Chinese player, which was possibly one of the triggers for a sequence during which his seven-point lead was cut to one, almost altering the outcome of the match. “Sometimes at critical moments it can make such a difference,” Baun said. “There are times when a match can go either way. I really still think that shuttle was out and that we should have gone to a third game. “So it would be really good to be able to be able to appeal to computer replays as they do in quite a few other sports.” This is what is likely to happen next year, according to Paisan Rangsikitpho, the vice-president of the Badminton World Federation (BWF), the sport’s international governing body. “We have done some research and I think it is likely we will use computer replays on an experimental basis in selected major events around the world in 2013, he said. “It won’t be HawkEye (a system used for ruling on line-calls in tennis and lbw decisions in cricket), which is not 100% accurate, but there is something else we have been looking at, and which we would like to try. “It’s time we had it, because we get some issues, and the crowds like it (replays). We need it.” — AFP .
Only wishing that BWF know ...... . Hahaha... Only wishing that BWF know that they should implement computer/video ASAP. .
